Imagine the reaction from the mainstream media if some conservative group, no matter how fringe, had called for the trial of Barack Obama on unproven charges. Does anybody doubt that they would focus on such a story in a very big way? Well, something like this has happened except it is the dean of the unaccredited Massachusetts Law School at Andover, Lawrence Velvel, who has called for a conference this September to plan war crimes trials against members of the Bush administration. Of course, the MSM is ignoring this story because it would hurt the Obama campaign. Here is what the ABA Journal has reported about this proposed conference (emphasis mine):
The dean of Massachusetts School of Law at Andover is planning a September conference to map out war crimes prosecutions, and the targets are President Bush and other administration officials.
The dean, Lawrence Velvel, says in a statement that “plans will be laid and necessary organizational structures set up, to pursue the guilty as long as necessary and, if need be, to the ends of the Earth."
Other possible defendants, he said, include federal judges and John Yoo, the former Justice Department official who wrote one of the so-called torture memos.
“We must insist on appropriate punishments,” he continued, “including, if guilt is found, the hangings visited upon top German and Japanese war criminals in the 1940s."
Velvel elaborates in an introduction to a series of articles published in The Long Term View (PDF). He writes “there is no question” that Bush and other officials are guilty of the federal crime of conspiracy to commit torture.
So Velvel, who is best known for making himself a laughingstock in early 2006 for claiming that Samuel Alito was not qualified to be a Supreme Court justice because he was too intellectual, not only is planning a war crimes trial conference but is already proclaiming guilt on Bush and other officials. Although the MSM is tossing Velvel and his absurd war crimes conference down the memory hole, the leftwing blogosphere is abuzz with excitement over the prospect of putting Bush and other officials on trial at a kangaroo court. Here are just a few of the sanity-challenged rantings at the Democratic Underground in which the DUers fantasize over what types of punishments should be doled out:
There's something awfully compelling about the thought of The Commander Guy with a five-day growth of gray-white beard, sloppy drunk on muscatel, another pretzel gash across his cheek but, ooops, he hasn't seen a pretzel in months. Staggering into the homeless shelter and getting his ass kicked right back out as soon as he's recognized...
And Cheney with nobody to polish his scalp, $400 shoes with big holes in the thin leather soles, newspaper stuffed inside in a failed effort to keep out the rain and the cold, and now when he shoots somebody in the face while hunting, nobody's laughing. Instead, he gets busted just like all the rest of us would and the arresting cop decides to tase him just because he deserves it. Ooops, that fancy defibrillator isn't built to handle that kind of jolt. Ah well, it had to happen sooner or later...
I've never before considered that there are things worse for them and more personally satisfying for me than the scaffold or life without parole at Abu Ghraib or Gitmo. With maybe a little dose of their own approved "enhanced interrogation" methods thrown in just for justice' sake. Not that I'd reject either of those outcomes, but I really wouldn't mind seeing them deposited in a modern urban hell-scape that looks like a set from "Escape from New York." Except Snake won't be helping anybody out this time.
In case you think such psychotic rantings are limited to the Democratic Underground which has a well deserved reputation for being quite a bit less than rational, you would be wrong. The Daily Kos, where many prominent liberals post, is every bit as crazed over this subject as the DUers as evidenced by their moonbat screechings;
Seeing him dangling from a rope is just too much to hope for.
I like the part about Hanging them. Warms my heart to see this... to imagine Bush dangling and twisting in the wind. Realistically, speaking though, Bush WOULD be sentenced to death for treason and war crimes and the sentence be communted to life w/o parole.Rot in prison.
I am opposed to capital punishment. However, in this case I would think that those in opposition might find it more acceptable if some more human features could be introduced: After the gallows, dragging of bodies through streets behind horses, Hummers or other outmoded forms of transport, with cobblestoned streets lined with cheering, expectorating spectators hurling rocks, rotted tomatoes and epithets--bringing in a more human element, allowing greater personal participation by the citizenry rather than merely cold execution by distant officials.
I think that Obama is playing this just right. He is leaving the door open to investigate after he is elected.
It turns out that there is a some truth in the latter Kossack statement. Last April, in an interview with Will Bunch of the Philadelphia Daily News, Obama stated:
What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that's already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can't prejudge that because we don't have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You're also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we've got too many problems we've got to solve.
So this is an area where I would want to exercise judgment -- I would want to find out directly from my Attorney General -- having pursued, having looked at what's out there right now -- are there possibilities of genuine crimes as opposed to really bad policies. And I think it's important-- one of the things we've got to figure out in our political culture generally is distinguishing betyween really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity. You know, I often get questions about impeachment at town hall meetings and I've said that is not something I think would be fruitful to pursue because I think that impeachment is something that should be reserved for exceptional circumstances. Now, if I found out that there were high officials who knowingly, consciously broke existing laws, engaged in coverups of those crimes with knowledge forefront, then I think a basic principle of our Constitution is nobody above the law -- and I think that's roughly how I would look at it.
Despite the fact that the proposed war crimes trials is a hot topic in the leftwing blogosphere and the fact that Obama has left the door open for prosecution of Bush administration officials, the MSM continues to ignore this topic. Perhaps they realize that it would be premature to publicize it until after the election.